H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 04:30 UTC
Ekaterina Makarova vs Aleksandra Krunic H2H: 0-2
Aleksandra Krunic holds a 2–0 lead over Ekaterina Makarova in their WTA head-to-head. Across 2 main-draw meetings, Aleksandra Krunic leads 2–0 on clay. Most recently, Aleksandra Krunic won the 2018 Istanbul third round 1-6 6-1 6-4.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
RUS
Age 38
Left-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
0
–
2
2 main draw meetings
SRB
Age 33
Right-Handed
163 cm / 5'4"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2018* | Istanbul | WTA 250 | R32 | Clay | Aleksandra Krunic | 1-6 6-1 6-4 | Ekaterina Makarova | Match data |
| Apr 28, 2016* | Rabat | WTA 250 | R16 | Clay | Aleksandra Krunic | 6-2 6-2 | Ekaterina Makarova | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ekaterina Makarova | #1,000 | #8 | 3,620 | 1,940 | 248 | 222 | 52.8% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Aleksandra Krunic | #470 | #39 | 1,210 | 1,771 | 86 | 117 | 42.4% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Ekaterina Makarova | Aleksandra Krunic | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 18 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2011 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #223 | 1,504 | 0 | 0 |
| 19 | 2007 | 2–2 | 50.0% | #110 | 1,536 | 0 | 0 | 2012 | 2–1 | 66.7% | #165 | 1,525 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 2008 | 17–20 | 45.9% | #46 | 1,626 | 0 | 0 | 2013 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #151 | 1,463 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 2009 | 19–22 | 46.3% | #60 | 1,634 | 0 | 0 | 2014 | 5–6 | 45.5% | #87 | 1,524 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 2010 | 14–20 | 41.2% | #49 | 1,662 | 0 | 1 | 2015 | 12–19 | 38.7% | #108 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 2011 | 15–23 | 39.5% | #53 | 1,604 | 0 | 1 | 2016 | 4–11 | 26.7% | #144 | 1,604 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 2012 | 26–19 | 57.8% | #20 | 1,757 | 0 | 1 | 2017 | 20–13 | 60.6% | #54 | 1,752 | 0 | 1 |
| 25 | 2013 | 24–18 | 57.1% | #24 | 1,838 | 0 | 1 | 2018 | 19–21 | 47.5% | #55 | 1,728 | 0 | 2 |
| 26 | 2014 | 39–21 | 65.0% | #11 | 1,837 | 0 | 2 | 2019 | 5–14 | 26.3% | #163 | 1,561 | 0 | 2 |
| 27 | 2015 | 26–16 | 61.9% | #23 | 1,784 | 0 | 2 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 28 | 2016 | 23–18 | 56.1% | #30 | 1,782 | 0 | 2 | 2021 | 6–6 | 50.0% | #128 | 1,645 | 0 | 2 |
| 29 | 2017 | 27–21 | 56.2% | #33 | 1,836 | 0 | 3 | 2022 | 9–10 | 47.4% | #115 | 1,636 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 2018 | 16–19 | 45.7% | #57 | 1,750 | 0 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 31 | 2019 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #997 | 1,700 | 0 | 3 | 2024 | 2–7 | 22.2% | #286 | 1,605 | 0 | 2 |
| 32 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 2025 | 0–3 | 0.0% | #468 | 1,567 | 0 | 2 |